Pennsylvania election officials were just ordered to speed up their response to a GOP lawsuit seeking to flip the state from Joe Biden to President Trump.
The man who gave the order is Justice Samuel Alito, a hated name for liberals.
The Washington Examiner reports:
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito changed a key deadline for Pennsylvania officials to respond to a lawsuit from Republicans seeking to flip the state election’s result from Joe Biden to President Trump.
On Sunday, Alito moved the deadline for Pennsylvania officials to respond from Wednesday, Dec. 9 at 4 p.m. to Tuesday, Dec. 8 at 9 a.m., the day of the state’s safe harbor deadline. The previous deadline meant that Congress could not change any of the electors set by the state after the date. This year, the Electoral College meets on Dec. 14 to cast its votes in the election, making the winner of the election the next president.
Republicans in Pennsylvania asked the Supreme Court to overturn the state’s 2019 law on mail-in voting, a legal endeavor spearheaded by GOP Rep. Mike Kelly and Trump ally Sean Parnell. They argue that a state statute known as Act 77 violates the state and federal Constitution by allowing for “no-excuse mail-in” votes on a large scale. The act allowed voters to cast their ballots by mail up to 50 days prior to an election without giving an excuse, which was previously required in order to receive an absentee ballot. More than 2.5 million Pennsylvania residents voted by mail last month, constituting over one-third of total ballots cast statewide.
According to court documents, “Petitioners seek relief for violation of their due process rights and rights to petition under the Fourteenth and First Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, effected by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision. Pennsylvania’s General Assembly exceeded its powers by unconstitutionally allowing no-excuse absentee voting, including for federal offices, in the Election.”
Republican senator Ted Cruz is one of the prominent voices that has urged the Supreme Court to review the case, noting: “This appeal argues that Pennsylvania cannot change the rules in the middle of the game. If Pennsylvania wants to change how voting occurs, the state must follow the law to do so.”